Follow IWPR on Twitter

The Gender of Nuclear Disaster

Is it that men tend to engage in reckless behavior while women are more cautious in the face of risk? A new poll shows that women in the U.S. are much less inclined than men to build new nuclear facilities in the country in the wake of the current Japanese crisis.

I could be wrong, but doubt that women were responsible for the decision to locate the reactors in Fukushima. I do not think women are inherently smarter or more responsible than men, but you have to wonder about an apparently male love of reckless behavior when, days after the nuclear disaster began unfolding in Japan (Tuesday the 15th to be precise), polling revealed that a solid majority of American men favored, and a solid majority of American women opposed, construction of new nuclear power plants in the United States.

We could search far and wide for explanations, but the simplest and most obvious is provided by the example of Florence Nightingale. In case you do not know, the barrage of media messages asking us to help victims of the earthquake, tsunami, and developing nuclear disaster in Japan by donating to the Red Cross, involve an organization inspired by Florence Nightingale’s efforts to alleviate the pain and suffering of wounded soldiers in the Crimean War of the 1850’s (the organization was in fact founded by a man). She formalized what was and is often true in modern and not-so-modern societies: Men engage in reckless behavior and women clean up the human wreckage that results.

Consider any vulnerable population in the U.S. today – whether it is infants and children, adults with disabilities, or the elderly who are frail – and you will find women performing most of the carework for these populations. And when anyone performs this work, and carries that level of responsibility, they tend to become a little more responsible in terms of policy options that might put more people at risk for needing care, for being hurt.

I am not engaging in male-bashing here. Today’s American men are doing far more child care and other carework than their forefathers did. I know many young men who are proud of the fact that they took paternity leave when a child was born, and a growing though still small number of dads share child and elder care and housework equally with the women who are their partners. But that is not typical. Once it is, I suspect that the idea of building new nuclear power facilities will strike most men the same way it strikes me – as an act of lunacy.

Robert Drago is Director of Research at the Institute for Women’s Policy Research.

2 thoughts on “The Gender of Nuclear Disaster”

I’m a long-time supporter of IWPR and this blog post concerns me. IWPR is not an environmental or energy organization, and this post has very little connection to gender. What’s more, its focus on gender is itself offensive. It essentializes gender (women = caretakers = wisdom) and when you have to inform your readers that you are not male-bashing, that is a sign that you might be male-bashing.

I urge IWPR to remove this personal opinion of Dr. Drago’s, hopefully before it does any damage to IWPR’s reputation. This post is neither objective nor research-based and was embarrassing to read.

This may not be “male-bashing,” but it is an offensive, essentialist, irrational argument.

An equally logical (which is to say not at all logical) argument one could make: the fact that women are more likely to oppose nuclear power is the result of them being irrational and incapable of weighing the relative risks and costs of fossil fuel-reliant power plants vs. the relative risks and costs of nuclear power. Women are overly emotional, possibly because they do more care-giving and have more protective instincts. It’s a good thing men have historically had more power over decisions like how to regulate power plants.

Or maybe beliefs about nuclear power have nothing to do with taking part in carework. What an irresponsible post. I expect more from your organization.